In anticipation of implementation specific behavior (eg. see proposals #18 #42) we should think about adding information related to the architecture of the implementation. This may also be necessary for future virtual devices and even 32-bit architectures.
Detailed Design
Add a new field called "target_implementation" to the schema of type string.
Drawbacks
Alternatives
Unresolved Questions
Should this be a constrained list of strings?
Should we also add a separate field for the 8bit/32bit versions?
Consider also having an entry for virtual devices in addition to hardware architectures.
Goncalo suggests calling this "Architecture" = enum[atmel, pico, virtual, etc...]
Summary
Add implementation information to the device schema (https://github.com/harp-tech/protocol/blob/main/schema/device.json)
Motivation
In anticipation of implementation specific behavior (eg. see proposals #18 #42) we should think about adding information related to the architecture of the implementation. This may also be necessary for future virtual devices and even 32-bit architectures.
Detailed Design
Add a new field called "target_implementation" to the schema of type string.
Drawbacks
Alternatives
Unresolved Questions
Should this be a constrained list of strings? Should we also add a separate field for the 8bit/32bit versions?
Design Meetings